Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 20

ISRAEL JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS 146 (2005), 223-242

A BASIC INEQUALITY AND NEW CHARACTERIZATION OF

WHITNEY SPHERES IN A COMPLEX SPACE FORM
BY

HAIZHONG LI*
Department of Mathematical Sciences, Tsinghua University
Beijing, 100083, People's Republic of China
e-mail: hli@math.tsinghua.edu.cn
AND
LUC VRANCKEN ~

LAMATH, I S T V 2, Campus du Mont Houy, Universitd de Valenciennes

59313 Valenciennes Cedex 9, France
e-mail: luc.vrancken@univ-valenciennes.f'r

ABSTRACT
Let N n (4c) be an n-dimensional complex space form of constant holomorphic sectional curvature 4c and let x: M n -+ Nn(4c) be an n-dimensional
Lagrangian submanifold in N n (4c). We prove that the following inequality always hold on Mn:

[Vh] 2 > n ~ 2 1 V l - / ~ [ 2,
where h is the second fundamental form and H is the m e a n curvature
of the submanifold. We classify all submanifolds which at every point
realize the equality in the above inequality. As a direct consequence of
our Theorem, we give a new characterization of the Whitney spheres in
a complex space form.

* Supported by a research fellowship of the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung

2001/2002 and the Zhongdian grant of NSFC.
t Partially supported by a research fellowship of the Alexander von Humboldt
Stiftung.
Received November 5, 2003
223

224

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

1. I n t r o d u c t i o n
Let Nn(4c) be a complete, simply connected, n-dimensional Kaehler manifold
with constant holomorphic sectional curvature 4c. When c = 0, Nn(4c) = ca;
when c > O, Nn(4c) = cpn(4c); when c < O, Nn(4c) = CH~(4c). Let x: M --+
Nn(4c) be an immersion from an n-dimensional Riemannian manifold M into
N n(4c). M is called a L a g r a n g i a n s u b m a n i f o l d if the complex structure J
of N ~ (4c) carries each tangent space of M into its corresponding normal space9
In order to state our results, we introduce the following examples.
Example 1: W h i t n e y s p h e r e in C n (see , , ). It can be defined as
the Lagrangian immersion of the unit sphere S n, centered at the origin of R n+l ,
in C n, given by (up to translation and scaling)
(19
1
O : S ~ - ~ C ~, ~ ( x l , . . . , X ~ + l ) - l + x n + 2 1 (x l , x l x n + l , " "" 'Xn'XnXn+l) 9

From a Riemannian point of view, this Lagrangian sphere plays the role of the
round sphere in the Lagrangian setting.
Example 2: W h i t n e y s p h e r e s in CP~(4) (see , , )9 They are a oneparameter family of Lagrangian spheres in Cpn(4), given by

O0:S ~--+CP~(4),

(1.2)

II 0

(I)(Xl,...

0>0,

CO+ iSOXn+l '

C~ ..~ 80Xn+
2 2 1

]'

where co = cosh0, so = sinh0, II: S 2~+1 --+ c p n ( 4 ) is the Hopf projection.

We notice that O0 are embeddings except in double points, and that ~o is the
totally geodesic Lagrangian immersion of S n in c p n ( 4 ) .
Example 3: W h i t n e y

s p h e r e s in C H n ( - 4 ) (see , , ). They are a

one-parameter family of Lagrangian spheres in C H ~ ( - 4 ) , given by
~e: S n --+ C H n ( - 4 ) ,
(1.3)

Oo(xl,

Xn+l)=I-i~
9 '',

0 > 0,

(xl'''''xn)'sOcO(1-+x2+l)--ixn+l~
'
~2 ---2-2
]'
\88 "~ iCOXn+l
~0 T C O ~ n + 1

where co = coshS, so = sinh0, II: H~ n+l --~ C H n ( - 4 ) is the Hopf projection;

Oe are also embeddings except in double points.
2 - y n2 = - 1 }
Example4: I f R H n-~ = {y = ( y ~ , . . . , y n ) e R n : y2 + ' ' ' + yn_~
denotes the (n - 1)-dimensional real hyperbolic space, following  (cf. ), we

225

define a one-family of Lagrangian embeddings

~ : \$1

RHn-1 ~ C H ~ ( - 4 ) ,

fl 9 (0,7r/4],

given by
(1.4)

q~(eU,y) = II o (

1
t (cos/~ cos t - isinflsint;y) )
sin fl cos t + i cos fl sin

where H: H12~+l --+ C H n ( - 4 ) is the Hopf projection.

Example 5: Following  (cf. ), we define a one-family of Lagrangian
embeddings
~)v: R n = R 1 x R n - 1 ----} C H n ( - 4 ) ,

p > 0,

given by
(1.5)

(2

(~(L'2+t 2) +2lx[ 2 + i g ~ t )

where el = 31 ( 0 , . . . , 0 , 1 , - 1 ) , e~ = ~1 ( 0 , . . . , 0 , 1 , 1 ) .
In  and , and for any Lagrangian submanifold of the complex Euclidean
space C n, the complex projective space CI?n or the complex hyperbolic space
CIEn , the following universal inequality was obtained:
[h[~ > 3n2 [H[2,
-n+2
where h is the second fundamental form and H is the mean curvature vector.
Moreover, it was shown that a Lagrangian submanifold realizes at every point
the equality in the above inequality if and only if it is totally geodesic or one of
the above examples.
In this paper, we prove the following result.
MAIN THEOREM:

manifold. Then

(1.6)

[X~hl2 > ~3n--lV

-n+2

where h is the second fundamental form and H is the mean curvature vector
of the submanifold. Moreover, the equality holds at every point in (1.6) if and
only if either
k* = 0,1 < i , j , k , l <_ n;
(t) M has parallel second fundamental form, i.e., hiy,~
or

226

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

(2.1) in case c = O, x( M) is an open portion of the Whitney sphere in C n, given

by (1.1);
(2.2) in case c = 4, x ( M ) is an open portion of one of the Whitney spheres in
c p n ( 4 ) , given by (1.2);
(2.3) in case c = - 4 , x ( M ) is an open portion of one of the Lagrangian submanifolds in C H n ( - 4 ) , given by (i.3), (1.4) and (1.5).
As a direct consequence of our Main Theorem, we get the following new
characterization of Whitney spheres.
COROLLARY: Let x: M -4 N~(4c) be an n-dimensional compact Lagrangian
submanifold with non-parallel mean curvature vector. Then
I hl 2 =

3n 2
n+2

IV

if and only if:

(1) In case c = O, x(M) is the Whitney sphere in C n, given by (1.1).
(2) In case c = 4, x ( M ) is one of the Whitney spheres in c p n ( 4 ) , given by

(1.2).
(3) In case c = - 4 , x ( M ) is one of the Whitney spheres in C H n ( - 4 ) , given
by (1.3).
Remark 1.1: In , , , the authors established the similar inequality
(1.6) for n-dimensional submanifolds in an (n +p)-dimensional unit sphere S n+p
in different contexts.
2. Preliminaries

Let Nn(4c) be a complete, simply connected, n-dimensional Kaehler manifold

with constant holomorphic sectional curvature 4c. Let M be an n-dimensional
Lagrangian submanifold in N n (4c). We denote the Levi-Civita connection of M
and Nn(4c) by V and XT, respectively: The formulas of Gauss and Weingarten
are respectively given by
(2.1)

fTxY=VxY+h(X,Y)

and

fTx~=-A~X+V~c~,

for tangent vector fields X, Y and normal vector field ~, where V is the
connection on the normal bundle. The second fundamental form h is related to
A~ by
(2.2)

Vol. 146, 2005

W H I T N E Y S P H E R E S IN A C O M P L E X S P A C E F O R M

227

The mean curvature v e c t o r / t of M is defined b y / 7 = ~ trace h and the mean

curvature function H is the length o f / t .
For Lagrangian submanifolds, we have (cf. )

V~cJY : J V x Y ,

(2.3)
(2.4)

AjxY

- J h ( X , Y)

= AjyX.

h(X,Y),JZ

The above formulas immediately imply that <

symmetric, i.e.,

(2.5)

> is totally

< h(X, Y), J Z > = < h(Y, Z), J X > = < h(Z, X), J Y > .

For a Lagrangian submanifold M in N n (4c), an orthonormal frame field

e l ~ . . . ~en~el*~ .. 9 ~en*

is called an adapted Lagrangian f r a m e field if el,...,en are orthonormal

tangent vector fields and el*,. 99 en* are normal vector fields given by
(2.6)

el. : Jel~...,en*

-- flen.

Their dual frame fields are 01,..., 0n, the Levi-Civita connection forms, and
normal connection forms are Oij and 0i*j,, respectively.
Writing h(ei, ej) = ~ k hk~ ek*, (2.5) is equivalent to
k*

i*

j*

h i j = h k j = hik ,

(2.5)'

l < i,j,k

< n.

If we denote the components of curvature tensors of V and V by R i j k l and

R~Zij, respectively, then the equations of Gauss, Codazzi and Ricci are given
by
j*

(2.7)

R m i l p -': C(~ml(~ip - ~mp~il) E ( h m l h i p

(2.8)
(2.9)

Ri*j*kl

j * __

J
k* , l < _ i , j , k , l < n ,
hk~l=hil,j
X-"r~i* ~J*
---- C(SjlSik -- 5jkSil) + ff_.~\,~mk,~ml

,hJ*~mp,hJ*),~il

i* j*

-- h m l h m k ),

where hik-[l is defined by

k.

(2.10)
l

k"

Eh
l

;e.

"
l

228

H. LI AND L. V R A N C K E N

Isr. J. Math.

We can write (2.10) in the following equivalent form:

( V x h ) ( Y , Z ) = V ~ h ( Y , Z ) - h ( V x Y , Z) - h(Y, V x Z ) ,

(2.10)'

where X , Y , Z are tangent vector fields on M. We note that (Vekh)(ei,ej) =

k* totally symmetric, i.e.,
Combining (2.5)' with (2.8), we know hij,l

hk~l ---- hjl,k

i* = h j"
lk,i = h lki,j,

(2.11)

1 <_i , j , k , l <_n.

(2.12)

hkf,tP- hk~pI= E h~jR.~i~p+ E h~:Rmjl.+ E h~j*R~*k*Ip,

m

Rm*i*~p = Rmitp,

(2.13)
where hki~z; is defined by
(2.14)
k*

k*

P*
P

Letting i = j in (2.10) and carrying out summation over i, we have

E H f O, = dH a + E Ht'Ot'k*'

(2.15)

where H k*
H ,lk* : - H , kI*
"

~-~i h~/*. Moreover, as a consequence of (2.11), we have that

3. S o m e l e m m a s
LEMMA 3.1 (see Montiel-Urbano ): Let M be an n-dimensional Lagrangian
submanifold in Nn(4c). If p is a point of M, Sp the unit sphere in TpM and
f: Sp --+ R the function given by

f(v) =< h(v,v), Jv >,

then there exists an orthonormal basis { e l , . . . , e~} of TpM satisfying
(i) h(el, el) -- AiJei, i -- 1 , . . . , n , where A1 is the maximum o f f ;
(ii) A1 _> 2A~,i = 2 , . . . , n , and if A1 = 2Aj /'or some j C { 2 , . . . , n } ,

f(e ) :

0.

then

Vol. 146, 2 0 0 5

229

Proof'.

Let el be a vector of Sp where f attains its maximum. Then for any

unit vector v orthogonal to el, we have
(3.1)

and
(3.2)

0 >_ d2fel(v,v) = 6 < h(v,v), Jel > - 3 f ( e l ) .

From (3.1), we obtain that h(el, el) = AiJel, where A1 = f ( e l ) . Using (2.4),
this implies that el is an eigenvector of

AJe ~ .

So we can choose an orthonormal

basis { e l , . . . , en} of TpM which diagonalizes Aje~, i.e., Agelei = Aiei. So using
(2.4) we prove (i).
Now, using (3.2) one has that A1 >_ 2Ai for i E { 2 , . . . , n } . If A1 = 2Aj, for
some j C { 2 , . . . , n } , then d2fe~(ej,ej) = 0, and so dUfe~(ej,ej,ej) = 0. But
using (3.1), dUfe~(ej,ej,ej) = 6f(ej). This proves (ii).
|
When working at a point p of M, we will always assume that an orthonormal
basis is chosen such that Lemma 3.1 is satisfied.
LEMMA 3.2: Let x: M --+ N'~(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold.

Then
3n2 i V l ~ l 2
'

I~h12 > n + 2

(3.3)

where I~'hl 2 = ~i,j,k,t(hij,t)

k* 2 , ]V
holds in (3.3) if and only if
(3.4)

hij, _ re +n 2 (H k* 5jl + H,jk* 5~1 + H,tk* 5~j),

1 _< i, j, k, l _< n.

(3.5)

k*i'(~Jntz

k*

k*

It is easy to check that

3n2
(3.6)

0 < IWl 2 := ~

(w~)2

= iVhl 2 _ _r ~_ 2 1 v

HI,

i,j,k,l

where IVhl 2 -~ ~i,j,k,l(hij,l)

k* 2 and IV
= ~k,i(H,ik* )2.
Equality holds in (3.3) if and only if ]Wl 2 -- 0, i.e., w~k~ = 0, 1 < i , j , k , l <_ n,
which is equivalent to (3.4).

230

H . L I A N D L. V R A N C K E N

Isr. J . M a t h .

LEMMA 3.3: Let x: M ~ N n ( 4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold.

If (3.4) holds, then
H,ji* : ,~(~ij

(3.7)

vector field.
Proof'.
(3.8)
(3.9)

From (3.4), we have for all i, j, k, l

hk;, l _

n 2 ( H f h j L + Hkj.5, l + H~*hij),

re+

l*

'

re

l*

'

l*

4"

hij'k - n + 2 (H,i 5jk + H 'j ~ik "b H ' k 5ij).

k*
From (2.11), we have h~,k = hij,l
, therefore (3.8) and (3.9) imply

(3.10) H i,k* 5jlq-H,jk* 5 i l + H l,k* 5ij -- Hl;hjk,

+Hl;hik q-Hl;(~ij,,.

1 _< i , j , k , l _< n.

k*

1
n

According to the notation of , we note that the vector field - J / - I

~-~-k Hk* ek is a conformal vector field.
|

LEMMA 3.4: Let x: M --+ Nn(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold.

If (3.4) holds, then
(3.11) hk~l = #(hkihjl + 5kjhit + 5klhij),

#=n+2

(3.12)

e~(#) = 0,

(3.13)

/ : 2,...,n,
1 = 2,...,n.

(3.14)

el(#) = 0,

in which case (3.12) and (3.13) imply that # is a constant.

Proof: The first statement (3.11) follows immdiately from (3.7) and (3.4).
Taking the covariant derivative of (3.11) implies that

(3.15)

k*

Vol. 146, 2005

W H I T N E Y S P H E R E S IN A C O M P L E X S P A C E F O R M

231

(3.16)

Putting (2.7), (2.13), (2.9) into (2.12), we have

k*

k*

k*

m*

k*
=e(~13 ~

(3.17)

~.k* ~

~pj~~"

~ ~)

+ e(h~j~kp
P* (~kl) T ff_~
~ ,Ojm,Olm,~ip
]~k* hn* l~n* -- ~
~ ,~jm,Omp,~il
~k* ]~n* ~n*
*
-- hij
m,n
m,n
E

~k* ~n* ~n*

m,n

m,n
m* n* n*

n* n*
+ E hij hm~hkp - E hijm* hmp
hkl"
m,n

m,n

Substituting (3.15) and (3.16) into (3.17), we find that

k*
-----c(hlj
(~ip "[- h~( (~jp --

(3.18)

k*

+ c(h~}hkp - h~; 5kt) + ~ ~'176176~ * ~ "

_ ~hk*

m,n
k*

n*

n*

Z...,

hn* ~n*

m,n

k*

n*

r~*

+ E himhlmhjp - E himhmphj l
m~n
m,n
m* n* n*

n*

m~n

n*

m~n

Now we take an orthonormal frame as in Lemma 3.1. Then we have hij1"

)~iSij,1 <_ i,j <_ n. Choosing i = j = p = 1,l r 1 in (3.18), we get that
(3.19)

e~(~)hkl -- 3 e l ( ~ ) h k ~

=c(2\$l - ~1)5k, + ( - - 2 ~ l

+ 3 ~ 1 ~ -- )~.~klhkt,

(3.20)

el(#) = 0,

l = 2,...,n.

Choosing k = l r 1 in (3.19), we obtain (3.13). Finally, choosing i = j = 1,p

l,p,l r 1 in (3.18), by use of (3.20) we find that

(3.21)

(~p - ~l)(2~k -- A1)h~ = 0,

p # l,

p,l # 1,

232

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

which is equivalent to

(Ap-At)(AiAj%el-2AjelAj%el)=O, p # l ,

(3.21)'

p,l#l.

If Ap # Al(p,l # 1), then Ajepel C V(A1/2) (the eigenspace of Agel with

respect to eigenvalue A1/2). If Ajepel # 0 for some p, l # 1,p # l, we get (3.14)
from (3.21)' and (3.13). In this case, (3.12) and (3.14) imply that # is constant.
1

get
(3.22)

el(#) = (2Al-/\l)(C + AtA1- A~),

l=2,...,n.

Let y := AI - 2Al,l # 1; we have y _> 0 from Lemma 3.1. Thus we get from
(3.22)
(3.23)

el(p) = Y(y2 _ 4 c - A2),

y > 0.

(i) If - 4 c - A~ > 0, (3.23) has only one solution Yx > 0 and el (~) > 0.
(ii) If - 4 c - A2 < 0 and el (#) > 0, (3.23) has only one solution Yl > 0.
(iii) If - 4 c - A~ < 0 and el (#) < 0, (3.23) has two solutions Yl > 0 and Y2 > 0.
Therefore, from the definition of y and the above analysis, we conclude that
the solutions of (3.22) satisfy one of the following two cases:
CASE

i:

A2 =

(3.24)

A3 . . . . .

An.

CASE 2:

(3.25)

A2 . . . .

- At-4-1 # At+2 . . . . .

An.

Now we discuss Case 2 first and use the following convention about indices:
(3.26)

2<_a,b,c<r+l,

r + 1 _< a,/3,7_< n.

LEMMA 3.5: Let x: M --+ Nn(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold.

Assume that (3.11) holds and # is not a constant. In Case 2 (i.e., when (3.25)
holds), we have
(3.27)

Ajeo ea = Aje~ea = O,

2 < a < r + l,

r+2<a<n.

Vol. 146, 2 0 0 5

Proof:

233

(An - Aa)(A1Aje~ea - 2AJelAde~ea) -- O,

2 < a < r + 1,

r + 2 < a < n.

Thus we get Aje~ea E V(A1/2) (the eigenspace of Age1 with respect to eigenvalue A1/2).

If Aje~ea # 0 for some a , a , from L e m m a 3.4, we conclude

el(#) = 0. Combining with (3.20), we get # is constant, which is a contradiction to our assumption. Thus we prove (3.27).

(3.28)

U, V, W E V()~2)

where V(~2) is the eigenspace of Ajel with respect to eigenvalue )~2.

Proof." Let V(A2) be the eigenspace of Ajel with respect to A2. We may choose
e2 such t h a t at the vector e2 the function ](v) : = < h(v,v), Jv >, < v , v >= 1,
restricted to V(A2) attains its maximal value. Let
v=coste2+sintei,

0<t<27r,

3<i<r+l.

g(t) := f(coste2 + sintei).

It is easy to check t h a t g'(0) = 0 is equivalent to
(3.29)

3<i<r+l.

(3.30)

Choosing now p = k = 1,/ = i = j = 2 in (3.18), and using (3.20), (3.30)

together with Aje~ei = Aiei, we get
(3.31)

(-A22 + c + ~1~2)k2 = 0.

(3.32)

el(,)

Since we assumed t h a t el(#) # 0, (3.32) implies that c + ~1~2 - A2 # 0. Thus

it follows from (3.31) t h a t
(3.33)

k2 = 0.

234

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

f(e2) = < h(e2, e2), Je2 > = 0.

(3.34)

Noting that f(e2) is the maximum value of f(v) on V(A2) and f(v) is an odd
function, we conclude that
(3.35)

f ( X ) =< h ( X , X ) , J X >= 0,

VX e V(A2).

=0,

a, b, c E R.

Using a similar argument as in the proof of Lemma 3.6, we can prove

LEMMA 3.7: Under the same assumptions as in Lemma 3.5, we have
(3.36)

U, V, W E V(An)

where V(A,~) is the eigenspace o[ Ajel with respect to eigenvalue An.

Remark that Lemma 3.6 also remains valid in Case 1, provided # is not a
constant.
LEMMA 3.8: Under the same assumptions as in Lemma 3.5, we have
(3.37)

< h(ei,ej),Jek > = 0,

Proos
(i) I f i = a , j = b , k = c o r i = a , j = / 3 ,

2 _< i , j , k <_n.

k=%weget

(3.37) from (3.28) or

(3.36).
(ii) If i = a, j = b, k = a, we have from (2.2) and (3.27)

< h(ea,eb),Jea > = < Ageaea,eb > = 0.

(iii) If i = a, j =/3, k = a, we have from (2.2) and (3.27)

< h(ea, e~), Jea > = < Age. ea, e~ >-- O.

As the function # is globally defined and as el(#) r 0, we see that the vector
el is characterized as the normalised dual vector to the 1-form d#. This shows
that we can extend the vector el differentiably in a neighborhood of the point

WHITNEY SPHERES IN A COMPLEX SPACE FORM

235

p in such a way that at every point the function f attains a maximum at the
point p. As a consequence, the previous lemmas remain valid in a neighborhood
of the point p. We will denote the extensions of the vectors ei to vector fields,
and of the eigenvalues Ai to eigenfunctions, by using the same letters.
Under the same assumptions as in L e m m a 3.5, let

LEMMA 3.9:

A2 . . . . .

A j e l e i = Aiei,

Ar+l # Ar+2 . . . . .

An;

then

(3.38)

A1 -

3Aa

2 < a < r + 1,

iS constant,

and

(3.39)
Prod:

(3.40)

Aa-An

is constant,

r+2<a_<n.

k* _

hij'l

n+2

j*

k*

(H~I* (~jk -~ H l (~ik ~- H,I (~ij) :

0,

1 < i, j, k, 1 < n.

Choosing i = j = k = 1 in (3.40), we have

1"
n
1"
hll,t - 3 ~ - - ~ H , l = 0,

(3.41)

l</<n.

(3.42)

h 1"
~i,z-~ n
n+

H 1,l. = 0 ,

2<i<n,

l</<n.

Thus we have from (3.41) and (3.42)

(3.43)

h 1.
115 - 3 h ~ l = 0 ,

l<l<n.

1"
From definition (2.10) and (3.37), we have h~[,l = el(A1), hii,l
= ez(Ai),
i = 2 , . . . , n, 1 < I < n. Thus we have from (3.43)

(3.44)

et(A, - 3Ai) = 0,

i = 2,...,n,

l</<n.

(3.45)
A1-3Aa

is constant,

A1-3A~

is constant,

We prove (3.38) and (3.39) from (3.45).

2<a<r+1,

r+l<~<n.

236

H. LI A N D L, V R A N C K E N

Isr. J. M a t h .

LEMMA 3.10: Under the same assumptions as in Lemma 3.5, we get that
H =constant and ~Th = O, i.e., the second fundamental form h is parallel.

Proof:
(3.46)

If H is not constant, it follows from the previous lemma t h a t

is not a constant, i.e., dAa # O.

Aa

(3.47)

B y (3.39), we can introduce a constant K by

(3.48)

K := Am - Aa = constant.

(3.49)

(3.50)

(3.51)

(2Aa+K)dAa=0,

a=2,...,r+l,

which is a contradiction with (3.46). Thus H =constant.

Since H is constant, we have from L e m m a 3.1 and L e m m a 3.8 t h a t

= 1E

h(ek,ek)

thus

(3.52)

H 1. = H,

H i* = 0,

i = 2,...,n.

have
(3.53)

H,11" = 0.

Combining (3.53) with (3.7), we have A = 0, i.e., H k* = 0. We conclude now

from (3.4) t h a t h~,k = 0, i.e., the second fundamental form h of M is parallel.
|

WHITNEY SPHERES IN A COMPLEX SPACE FORM

237

PROPOSITION 3.1: Let x: M --4 N'~(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold. If (3.11) holds with # =constant, then # = 0 and M is of parallel
second fundamental form.
Proof: By the definition of #, (3.11) and (2.10)', we have
(3.54)

< (Vxh)(Y, Z), J W >

= # ( < Y , Z > < X , W > + < X , Z > < Y , W > + < Y , X > < Z , W >).

Aje~e~ = Ale1,

Ajelei = )~iei,

< h(ei,ej),Jek >= O,

i , j , k > 2.

Then Jell I/4. We take a geodesic 7(s) passing through p in the direction of el.
Let { E l , . . . , En} be a parallel vector field along this geodesic 7(s), such that
Ei(p) = ei and E1 = ~/'(s). Then we have by use of (3.54)
< Ei,Ej > = 5ij,

0
-~s < h(E1,E1),JEi > = < (VE~h)(E1,E1),JEi >
=0,

i_>2,

and
0
0--~ < h(E1, Ei), JEj > = < (VEIh)(E1, Ei), JEj > = 0,

i#jk2.

Thus we have
<h(E1,E1),JEi >=<h(el,el),Jei >=0,

i>2,

< h(E1,Ei), JEj > = < h(el,ei), Jej >= 0,

i,j>2,

and
that is, we can write
(3.55)

AjE1E1 = ~1E1,

AjEIEi = ~iEi,

i ~_ 2.

By use of Ricci identities and the fact that # =constant, repeating the arguments
of the proof of (3.13) we can get that along 7(s) we have
(3.56)

i ~ 2.

However, using (3.54), we have that along 7(s)

(3.57)

00
~ss~l(s) = ~ss < h(E1, El), JE1 > = < (VElh)(E1,E1), JE1 > = 3#

238
and
(3.58)
o

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

0
Ai(s) = -~s < h(Ex,Ei),JEi > = < (VElh)(E1,Ei),JEi > = #,

By use of
that
(3.59)

(3.57)

(3.56)

i _> 2.

along "/(s) implies

, ( c - 3 ~ + X~) = 0.

By use of (3.57) and (3.58), the first and second derivatives of (3.59) imply
6#2(A1 -/~i) = O,

i _> 2,

12# 3 = O,

k* ---- 0, i.e.,
from which we conclude that # = 0. From (3.11) we know that hij,l
M is of parallel second fundamental form.
|

4. P r o o f o f M a i n T h e o r e m

From the discussions of Section 3, it follows that

PROPOSITION 4.1: Let x: M --+ Nn(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold; then
(4.1)

IVhl 2 > 3n2 IV

-n+2

whereas the equality holds in (4.1) at every point if and only if one of the
following two cases occurs:
(i) M is of parallel second fundamental form;
(ii) for every point p belonging to an open dense subset of M there exists an
adapted Lagrangian frame field e l , . . . , en, el*,...,en* with el. parallel
to H such that the second fundamental form of M in Nn(4c) takes the
following form:
(4.2)

h(el,el) = ~le.,

h(e~,e~) . . . . .

h(el,ej)=A2ej.,

h(ej,ek)=O,

with
(4.3)
(~7xh)(Y,Z)=#(<Y,Z> JX+<X,Z>
and d# vanishes nowhere.

h(e~,en) = ~ e ~ . ,

2<j~k<_n,

JY+<X,Y>

JZ),

#r

Vol. 146, 2 0 0 5

239

Remark 4.1: B. Y. Chen  called Lagrangian submanifolds with (4.2)

Lagrangian H-umbilical submanifolds.
Note that the first case has been classified by H. Naitoh (see ,  and
). Now we discuss what happens in the second case. Note that as # is not a
constant, we must have A1 ~ 2A2. As d# vanishes nowhere, everything can be
locally extended as indicated in the previous section. Choosing X = Y = Z = el
and X = ei(i > 2), Y = Z = el in (4.3), respectively, we get that
(4.4)

(~el h)(el, el) = 3 # J e l

and
(4.5)

(Ve~h)(el,el) = #Jei,

i >_ 2.

It is a direct check using (2.10)' and (4.2), (4.4) and (4.5) that this implies
(4.6)

el(A1) = 3#,

V e l e l -~ 0,

and
(4.7)

ei(A1) = 0,

Ve~el -

- - e l#,
A1 -- 2A2

i > 2.

Now choosing X = Y = Z = el, i > 2 in (4.3), we have

(4.8)

(V~h)(e~,ei) = 3 # J e ,

i _> 2.

From (2.10)' and (4.2), we get by use of (4.7)

((Ye~ h)(ei, ei) = V ~ h(ei, ei) - 2h(Ve~ ei, ei)
= V ~ ( A 2 J e l ) - 2 < el,Ve~ei > h(el,ei)
-

(4.9)

2~

< ez,Ve~ei > h(et,e~)

1>2

=ei(A2)Jel + A1A2#
-2A-~ Je~ - 2 < el,Ve~e~ > A2Jei
=ei(A2)Jel +

3A2# Jei,
A1 - 2A2)

It follows from (4.8) and (4.9) that

p-

A2#
A1 - 2A2"

i > 2.

240

H. LI A N D L. V R A N C K E N

Isr. J. M a t h .

As # # 0, we have
(4.10)

A1 = 3A2.

By use of (4.10), we now can easily check that in this case

hikj. _ n n+ 2(Hk.5~ J + Hi" 5kj + H ~9 5ik),
which is equivalent to
2(n + 2)

n + 2

H2=n-~(n--1)R-

c,

where R is the scalar curvature of M. In case c = 0, by ,  or , x(M) is

an open portion of the Whitney sphere in C n, given by (1.1). In case c = 4, by
, , , x(M) is an open portion of one of the Whitney spheres in Cpn(4),
given by (1.2). In case c = - 4 , by , , , x(M) is an open portion of one of
the Lagrangian submanifolds in C H n ( - 4 ) , given by (1.3), (1.4) and (1.5). This
completes the proof of the Main Theorem.
5. R e m a r k s

k* = hij,k
t" ,
hij,l

(5.1)

Hk*
i*
,~ : H,k.

j.

(5.2)

t* -- n n+ 2 (H'ki*hjl + H,k 5il + H~hij),

hij'k

l < i , j , k , l < n.

Define L~jl and its covariant derivative Lijl,k as follows:

(5.3)

(5.4)

L~jl = h~ - - - -n- ~ ( H
n+

i*

l <_i,j,l <_n,

k
k
k
k

Lijt,k =0, 1 < i, j, k, l <_ n.

From the proof of our Main Theorem, we get

Vol. 146, 2 0 0 5

241

THEOREM 5.1: Let x: M -4 Nn(4c) be an n-dimensional Lagrangian submanifold. If

Lijl,k =O,

(5.5)

l <_i,j,k,l < n,

then either
(1) M has parallel second fundamental form, i.e., h~],l = O, 1 <_ i,j, k, l <_ n;
or
(5.6)

Lijl = O,

1 <_ i , j , l <_ n.

In the latter case, we have the following classifications.

(2.1) In case c = O, x ( M ) is an open portion of the Whitney sphere in C n, given
by (1.1).
(2.2) In case c = 4, x ( M ) is an open portion of one of the Whitney spheres in
c p n ( 4 ) , given by (1.2).
(2.3) /n case c = - 4 , x ( M ) is an open portion of one of the Lagrangian submanifolds in C H ~ ( - 4 ) , given by (1.3), (1.4) and (1.5).

help.
References

 V. Borrelli, B. Y. Chen and J. M. Morvan, Une caractdrization gdomdtrique de

la sphere de Whitney, Comptes Rendus de l'Acad~mie des Sciences, Paris, S~rie
I, Math~matique 321 (1995), 1485-1490.
 I. Castro, C. R. Montealegre and F. Urbano, Closed conformal vector fields and
Lagrangian submanifolds in complex space forms, Pacific Journal of Mathematics
199 (2001), 269 302.
 I. Castro and F. Urbano, Lagrangian surfaces in the complex Euclidean plane with
conformal Maslov form, The T6hoku Mathematical Journal 45 (1993), 565-582.
 I. Castro and F. Urbano, Twistor holomorphic Lagrangian surfaces in the complex
projective and hyperbolic planes, Annals of Global Analysis and Geometry 13
(1995), 59-67.
 B. Y. Chen, Jacobi's elliptic functions and Lagrangian immersions, Proceedings
of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Section A 126 (1996), 687-704.
 B. Y. Chen, Interaction of Legendre curves and Lagrangian submanifolds, Israel
Journal of Mathematics 99 (1997), 69 108.

242

H. LI AND L. VRANCKEN

Isr. J. Math.

 B. Y. Chen, Complex extensors and Lagrangian submanifolds in complex

Euclidean spaces, The TShoku Mathematical Journal 49 (1997), 277-297.
 B. Y. Chen and K. Ogiue, On totally real submanifolds, Transactions of the
American Mathematical Society 193 (1974), 257-266.
 B. Y. Chen and L. Vrancken, Lagrangian submanifolds satisfying a basic equality,
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 120 (1996), 291-307.
 R. Harvey and H. B. Lawson, Calibrated geometries, Aeta Mathematica 148
(1982), 47-157.
 G. Huisken, Flow by mean curvature of convex surfaces into spheres, Journal of
Differential Geometry 20 (1984), 237-266.
 H. Li, Willmore surfaces in S n, Annals of Global Analysis and Geometry 21
(2002), 203-213.
 H. Li, Willmore submanifolds in a sphere, Mathematical Research Letters 9
(2002), 771-790.
 S. Montiel and 17. Urbano, Isotropic totally real submanifolds, Mathematische
Zeitschrift 199 (1988), 55-60.
 H. Naitoh, Totally real parallel submanifolds, Tokyo Journal of Mathematics 4
(1981), 279-306.
 H. Naitoh, Parallel submanifolds of complex space forms I, Nagoya Mathematical
Journal 90 (1983), 85-117; II, ibid 91 (1983), 119-149.
 H. Naitoh and M. Takeuchi, Totally real submanifolds and symmetric bounded
domain, Osaka Journal of Mathematics 19 {1982), 717-731.
 A. Ros and F. Urbano, Lagrangian submanifolds of C n with conformal Maslov
form and the Whitney sphere, Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan 50
(1998), 203-226.